Politicians in the Israeli state say the Talmud justifies gunning down a thirteen-year-old Palestinian girl holding a pair of scissors:

"Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot, the chief of staff of the Israeli military, recently caused a stir when he told an audience of high school students that he would not want a soldier to empty a magazine on a Palestinian girl of 13 holding a pair of scissors. He was attacked by rightist politicians who advocate a policy based on the Talmudic lesson 'Whoever comes to slay you, slay him first.”

"Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, the deputy chief of the military, caused an uproar in a speech for Israel’s Holocaust Remembrance Day this month, when he said he discerned disturbing trends in Israeli society that reminded him of processes that led to the rise of Nazi Germany.”—New York Times, May 30, 2016, p. A4.

________

We depend on private charity. Please give to expand the Truth Mission of Michael Hoffman. Your contribution helps to support the continuation of our writing and research. Donate now

Friday, May 27, 2016

Neocon super-patriots are outraged that a US President would lament the American massacre of tens of thousands of civilians at Hiroshima and by implication, in the Japanese city of Nagasaki as well (the latter was the capital of Catholicism in the Far East at the time it was incinerated). General Curtis LeMay’s air force, using conventional bombs, had earlier incinerated the largely wooden city of Tokyo, killing some 100,000 civilians. These massacres were supposed to be reprisals for Japan’s attack on an American military base at Pearl Harbor.

The signature alibi for the atomic barbarism is that it “shortened the war and saved American lives.” In 1985, while a reporter working in California and writing a story on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, I spoke on the phone with Walter Trohan, a former journalist for Colonel Robert McCormick’s populist newspaper, the Chicago Tribune. Trohan covered the White House. He had been close to all of the American presidents from FDR to Reagan. He knew the lesser fry too, such as Admiral William Leahy, Franklin Roosevelt’s chief of staff. Mr. Trohan informed this writer, with some indignation in his voice, even though the incident he was about to relate had occurred 42 years before, that Admiral Leahy told him as early as 1943 that the Japanese had been trying to surrender to US forces. He warned Trohan that if he printed that classified information before the war ended, Trohan would be imprisoned on a charge of espionage.

Trohan and his boss McCormick sat on the story until the Sunday in 1945 after Japan had been blasted with atomic bombs and had surrendered unconditionally. Then they printed the facts on the front page of the Chicago Tribune. From 1943 onward the government of Japan had sought a negotiated peace that would leave Emperor Hirohito on his throne and a caretaker Japanese government in Tokyo intact. All Japanese armed forces would be surrendered and American soldiers and Marines would enter Japan without a shot being fired. This was to be the conditional surrender.

After this peace deal was rebuffed by President Roosevelt, tens of thousands of US Marines and sailors, and hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilians were killed, sacrificed on the altar of Roosevelt’s doctrine of “unconditional surrender.”

Franklin Roosevelt was the presidential criminal who had allowed Pearl Harbor to be attacked. He knew in advance that the attack was coming in December 1941. Incredibly, nearly 75 years later much of the US intelligence on Pearl Harbor remains classified and not subject to Freedom of Information Act disclosure. What is “our” government hiding? Much of what can be pieced together was compiled by Robert Stinnett in his indispensable book, Day of Deceit; also worth reading is James Perloff’s report, “Pearl Harbor: Hawaii was Surprised; FDR Was Not,” in New American magazine, Dec. 7, 2015.

The Palestinians in particular and Muslims in general are students of history. They have noted that the U.S. and its Allies resorted to any means available, no matter how monstrous, to defeat what the Allies considered to be their “monstrous” foes, Germany and Japan. Terrorism against German troops (“partisan warfare”) as well as civilian populations (the civilian center of every major German city was bombed, and in many cases fire-bombed by British and US forces), was a routine occurrence. The goal was to exterminate, as far as possible, the men, woman and children of Germany and Japan.

When Palestinians shoot and bomb Israeli troops, or ISIS militants target French theaters and Belgian subway stations, they are merely adopting the same tactics the Allies used during the “Good War.” This is the terror contagion which we, in our boundless arrogance, have spread.

However cynical Mr. Obama’s ulterior motives for visiting Hiroshima may be, the fact is that his visit should serve as a reassessment of the Allied doctrine of justified terrorism inflicted on civilian populations residing in nations with which the US is at war. Otherwise, we can expect no less inhuman treatment from the Sunni Wahhabist/Salafist Muslims who are at war with us and who are following our inhuman example.

Obama’s next conciliatory visit should be in Dresden, Germany, the site of yet another genuine holocaust on par with Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Tuesday, May 17, 2016

The ideology of Neoplatonic Hermeticism gained firm purchase among members of the Catholic elite in Florence, Italy circa 1450; after that it entered the Vatican toward the end of the 15th century, and the papacy itself by 1515. It predates Hegel’s concept of thesis-antithesis-synthesis by centuries. Among its most famous early Renaissance practitioners were Cosimo and Lorenzo Medici and Nicolo Machiavelli.

But what of the pope’s victory at Lepanto and the papal burning of the Talmud? Those events were akin to Pope Paul VI issuing Humane Vitae (his encyclical condemning artificial birth control) while suppressing the Tridentine Latin Mass. The thesis is visible but not the occult antithesis, and people are deceived.

The current thesis has Pope Francis announcing that a Muslim Mayor of London with connections to Sunni Wahhabist extremists, is good for Europe, while in the same interview he poses his antithesis: praising and offering support to the anti-Muslim Society of St. Pius X (SSPX), founded by the late Archbishop Marcel Lefebvre:

La Croix: "You received, on the past April 1st, Bp. Bernard Fellay, Superior-General of the Society of Saint Pius X. Is the reintegration of the Lefebvrists in the Church once again being considered?"

Pope Francis: "In Buenos Aires, I always spoke with them. They saluted me, they asked for [my] blessing on their knees. They consider themselves Catholic. They love the Church. Bp. Fellay is a man with whom we can dialogue. It is not the case of other somewhat strange elements, such as Bp. Williamson, or others who have radicalized. I think, as I had expressed in Argentina, that they are Catholics on the path to full communion. During this Year of Mercy, it seemed that I should authorize their confessors to pardon the sin of abortion. They thanked me for this gesture...We dialogue well, we do a good work.”(End quote).

To the Right wing of the Church he gives this approbation to the “traditional Catholic” SSPX. To the Left he lends his support to mass Sunni-Salafist migration to Europe.

Pope Francis to La Croix:

"Coming back to the migrant issue, the worst form of welcome is to ‘ghettoize’them. On the contrary, it’s necessary to integrate them. In Brussels, the terrorists were Belgians, children of migrants, but they grew up in a ghetto…. I am thinking here of Pope Gregory the Great (pope from 590 – 604), who negotiated with the people known as barbarians, who were subsequently integrated. This integration is all the more necessary today since, as a result of a selfish search for well-being, Europe is experiencing the grave problem of a declining birth rate.” (End quote).

The terrorists congregate in a ghetto because their brand of Salafism demands a ghetto. It is not the fault of Europe. Some terrorists have been shown to have attended European universities often at the taxpayer’s expense, and yet still they return to their ghetto mentality and spew blood and fire upon the hand that fed them so generously.

Furthermore, Pope Gregory did not oversee the “integration” of barbarians into Europe in the sixth century. They were already there. They were mostly indigenous. Pope Gregory helped to organize the conversion of the barbarians. Only after they wereconverted to Catholicism were they integrated, and not before. Don’t imagine that Francis is not familiar with these facts. He is playing a game.

In the La Croix interview he purports to lament the declining birth rate of Europeans. This is a macabre jest. The pontiff has admonished Catholics for allegedly talking too much about abortion and contraception. He refused to campaign against laws in Ireland and under his nose in Italy, conferring state recognition of marriage upon practicing homosexuals. He is on record referring disparagingly to Catholics with many children, saying they breed like rabbits. On May 19, on learning that pro-abortion politician Marco Pannella had died, the Papal spokesman, Fr. Federico Lombardi praised —in a written statement, not off the cuff — the man who helped lead Italy in the 1970s to legalize abortion. [Rorate Caeli]

This writer will not be the only one to draw attention to the duplicity of Francis in these matters. But we will be mostly alone in raising the awareness that when the Pope issues these Janus-faced pronouncements and double-talk, he is doing so consonant with the 500-year-old tradition of Neoplatonic Hermeticism inside Rome.

Because we have been sufficiently processed, the game is played now in the open, whereas in centuries past, of necessity it operated in a more clandestine context. In either case, the joke is on us.

For more than a yeararticles attempting to deny the chronicle of the enslavement of white people have appeared in history magazines, websites and most recently the Irish Times newspaper.

The insistence that the entire epoch of brutal white bondage never happened — from the thralls of the Vikings to the villeinage of Anglo-Saxon England and the massive kid-nabbing operations which criminalized and abducted young white paupers in 17th century Britain and swept them onto ships for bondage unto death in the West Indies and British America — is one of the myths necessary to the maintenance of the current system of things, in particular the crushing psychic disorder of white guilt. Covered up in part by means of the imposition of the misleading “indentured servant” euphemism for all cases of white bondage, it continues to demand irrational obeisance in colleges and universities and the mainstream media.

Enter Jim Goad

Mr. Goad is the indefatigable journalist who wrote The Red Neck Manifesto. He is currently a columnist for Taki’s Magazine, an online weekly. He has chosen to give this writer, in an extensive interviewwhich appears here, the opportunity to refute the deniers. I hope you will take the time to peruse the interview and publicize it.